Tube Strikes

Tony Devenish: What are you going to do to end the tube strikes which are crippling London?

Sadiq Khan: Any strike action on TfL services is regrettable, particularly now as we need a fully functioning transport network to support London’s economic recovery from the pandemic. I have been clear that the industrial action we saw on London Underground at the start of the month was disappointing and frustrating. The action last month was the first network-wide strike to take place since I became Mayor in 2016. The previous Mayor presided over five network-wide strikes. Before the pandemic hit, we had reduced overall strike action on TfL service by over 70% compared to the previous Mayor’s record.
As the Assembly knows, the pandemic has had a devastating impact on TfL’s finances, requiring TfL to carefully consider its financial sustainability due to the huge loss of revenue it has experienced. As part of the funding agreements, the Government has not only required TfL to make large-scale savings but also to commission an independent review of its pension arrangements, which will be published on 31March [2022]. It is this pension review that is at the heart of the recent strike action against London Underground. TfL has been engaging with trade unions about how to deliver its Financial Sustainability Plan since early summer 2021. To date no proposals to change terms, conditions or pension arrangements have been announced and there are no plans for redundancies.
The National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT) is currently taking action on the returning Night Tube services. TfL met with the RMT ahead of the reopening of these services on the Central and Victoria lines and made proposals to resolve the dispute around drivers being rostered to work up to four night shifts a year, but these were rejected. Despite this ongoing action by the RMT, TfL has continued to run a good Night Tube service on the Victoria line and a regular service through central London.
I continue to call on the RMT to work with TfL to find solutions to these disputes as soon as possible, preventing further disruption to customers and damage to London’s economy at this challenging time.

Tony Devenish: MrMayor, the network completely shut down from 1 to 3March, particularly on the Tuesday and the Thursday, and you say it is disappointing. I asked you in my question: what are you going to do to end this Tube strike action that is crippling London? You have not given me an answer. You said to the previous question, which I actually agree with for once, that you were responsible for delivering transport in London. What are you going to do to actually stop more strikes that are crippling London, please?

Sadiq Khan: It is worth reminding the Member, because he may not have heard in my answer, the source of concern by the trade union RMT is the condition attached by the Government to have a pensions review. That is at the heart of the recent strike action. That is the source of the grievance: the actions of his Government.
As far as what we are going to do and what I am going to do, it is to persuade the RMT to talk to TfL to avoid disruptive strike action not only because it is premature but because actually it is no good for TfL or getting a recovery back. One of the things he could do to help is to ask his friends in the Government not to attach onerous conditions that lead to London coming to a standstill because of strike action from the RMT because of their conditions.

Tony Devenish: I agree with you they have used the excuse of the pensions review but they also said it was to do with pay and other conditions. You have not mentioned that at all.
Talking about pay, you have just given them an 8.4% pay rise. Londoners have had their days destroyed because they could not get to work, and they could not do the other things they needed to do. You have given this very militant union an 8.4% pay rise.

Sadiq Khan: Here we have it. The cat is out of the bag. Anti-trade union Tories use any excuse to bash workers organising collectively to negotiate from their employers. Let me be quite clear. Four years ago, we reached a deal with the transport trade unions and that four-year deal was a multiyear deal. What he is suggesting is that we should tear up that contract in year four because of two circumstances that were‑‑

Tony Devenish: No, Mr Mayor, what I am suggesting is you should actually allow Londoners to go to work or play with transport actually working. You are the Mayor of London. You are the Chair of TfL. Can you please stop these strikes?

Sadiq Khan: This tubthumping, typical, right-wing, anti-trade unionism is what we expect from the Tory Party, but if I could be allowed to respond‑‑

Tony Devenish: Anti-Londoners is what we expect from the Labour Party.

Sadiq Khan: Rude, hectoring Tories. Let me respond to the question raised now if I can‑‑

Tony Devenish: You should know about rudeness.

Keith Prince: AssemblyMember, let the Mayor answer, please.

Sadiq Khan: He does not like it, does he, when you go for him? Let me be quite clear. Anti-trade unionism is what the Tories believe in. It is in their DNA. I am quite clear: when you make a deal you stick by it. We made a deal four years ago and the deal was quite clearly a multiyear deal.
Let me be quite clear on the consequence of what he is saying. What he is saying is you cannot trust the Tories on a deal because, if the Tories reach a deal with you, they will tear it up when it suits them. What he is advocating is to throw in the bin and to tear up a deal made four years ago. Why would anybody in good faith reach an agreement with a Conservative politician when they are simply going to ignore it? That is one of the reasons why we have across the country so much unhappiness with a Government that is willing to not just break the law when it comes to parties in Downing Street but to break agreements with the trade unions‑‑

Tony Devenish: Deputy Chairman, this is him wasting my time. The reality is he has no plan to end the strikes, as always, and so I will leave it there.

Sadiq Khan: Are you sure?

Keith Prince: Thank you very much.

Support and Resilience for Ukraine

Anne Clarke: What work have you and the Deputy Mayor for Fire and Resilience undertaken in London to assist with the crisis arising from the invasion of Ukraine by Russia?

Sadiq Khan: From the beginning of Putin’s war of aggression, Londoners stood shoulder to shoulder with the people of Ukraine, and we will continue to do so as the situation develops. The Ukraine situation has not changed London’s threat level, but my Deputy Mayor for Fire and Resilience has taken a prudent approach and convened meetings of the London Resilience Forum to work through London’s Risk Register. These meetings have developed a set of London-specific planning assumptions to aid partners with their own preparedness. My officers are working closely with Government officials to ensure that our assessment remains up to date and reflective of any changes to the situation.
I have met with the Ambassador from Ukraine to the UK and his Deputy to discuss the deepening crisis, extend the offer of assistance on behalf of all Londoners and highlight the need for safe passage of Ukrainian refugees. Officers in the Deputy Mayor’s Resilience Team and across the GLA have been working with contacts at the Embassy and with the Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities to deliver what assistance we can. One of the major asks from the Ukrainian Embassy to Londoners is for help in the form of financial rather than physical donations. I commissioned a new web page on London.gov.uk with information about how to donate to reputable charities supporting both the humanitarian effort in Ukraine and Ukrainians in London. I encourage Londoners to continue to show their generosity in this way. Partners from across the London Resilience Partnership have also shown their generosity, donating specific pieces of kit to support the crisis in Ukraine.
The London Fire Brigade has been able to donate vital firefighting and rescue equipment and three of its firefighters from the International Search and Rescue Team are driving vehicles as part of a convoy, delivering fire and rescue kit and equipment to the Polish State Fire Service. This Saturday at 2pm Londoners can show their solidarity with Ukraine by joining me and others at the London Stands with Ukraine march from Park Lane to Trafalgar Square.

Anne Clarke: Thank you, Deputy Chairman, and good afternoon, MrMayor. I start with echoing your warm welcome to NazaninZaghari‑Ratcliffe, who lives in my constituency, and just how wonderful it is to see her reunited with her family in West Hampstead.
Coming back to my original question, your Smarter London Together roadmap says that you are looking into the viability of creating a shared cyber security operation centre for London. Can you update me on this work and what challenges we are facing related to cyber security at the moment?

Sadiq Khan: Without going into detail for obvious reasons, I work very closely with the Government, which has been incredibly collegiate in relation to potential threats to our city caused by Putin’s invasion of Ukraine and that includes, clearly, cyber security. Both the private sector but also organisations like TfL are well aware of potential cyber threats. It is important for me to reassure you and reassure Londoners that, working closely with the Government, we are doing what we can to avoid the possibility of any threats to our cyber caused by attacks from Putin’s Russia and that includes, clearly, cyber security. For obvious reasons, we cannot really talk about it publicly.

Anne Clarke: Yes. Thank you. Going back to the cost of living crisis, which we have discussed many times today because it is so important to London, I am worried that some Londoners - let alone affording a car - are unable are unable to cook the food that they receive from food banks. We are at that point where that is the reality; where food banks are considering the type of food they are giving out because they wonder if those receiving it are going to be able to afford to cook it. With the war, energy prices going up and transportation costs looking set to soar, what are you doing to assess the potential impacts of the war on Londoners such as higher food prices and higher cost of living?

Sadiq Khan: I have got to be frank in relation to the limitations of my power and resources in this area. One of the things we have to do is to make sure we ensure the Government and maybe some Members of this Assembly know the experiences of ordinary Londoners when it comes to poverty and making choices. It is not about what car they have - they do not own a car - but in relation to choosing between turning the heating on, putting food on the table, making the choice to go to work when they may have COVID because they are in a zero-hours contract and so forth. This is before National Insurance goes up, this is before the 54% increase in energy prices and this is before, as you said, the consequences of any sanctions against Russia really biting, caused by the invasion of Putin’s Russia in Ukraine. That is why you have seen the outroar over the last 24 hours after the Chancellor’s Budget. It is just tone deaf to some of the additional challenges that are just round the corner.
That is why it is really important that we do what we can with limited resources to provide debt advice 24 hours a day, 7 days a week - we do not want people going to loan sharks - but also to make sure people are applying for the benefits they are eligible to get in relation to the advice we give. It is really important, even though the benefits will not go up at the same level as the inflation.

Anne Clarke: Thank you, MrMayor.

Transport in London

Elly Baker: Who should run Transport in London? The Mayor of London or Government Ministers and civil servants in Whitehall?

Sadiq Khan: The spirit and the letter of the GLA Act is clear that it is the democratically accountable Mayor who is responsible for the delivery of transport services in the capital and it is a responsibility I take very seriously. London’s public transport has been revolutionised since TfL was formed in 2000 and responsibility was devolved to the Mayor and the GLA. For the last two decades TfL has been London’s transport and spatial planner, system integrator, network manager, regulator, operator and capital delivery body, accountable to a democratically elected Mayor. The devolution settlement enabled TfL to create an integrated, modern, affordable network that successfully facilitated the growth of the city from approximately seven million people in 2000 to over nine million today, while at the same time making the city more productive and efficient by increasing the share of trips made by public transport, walking and cycling. While historically transport services in London had been provided by a range of bodies and suffered from underinvestment, TfL has been able to make decisions informed by a clear understanding of the needs of London and deliver benefits beyond simply the provision of transport services.
Our model is envied across the globe. However, when it comes to funding, we are one of the only capital cities anywhere in the world that does not normally receive direct central Government operating subsidy. I was working with TfL to make good progress towards self-sufficiency until COVID struck and a system so heavily reliant on fares left the network dependent on Whitehall funding. The Government is saying it wants other parts of the country to have a London-style transport system and that is right in terms of our integrated transport network that so clearly serves the city’s needs but, if we are not careful, even London will not have a London-style transport system. Despite almost two years of talks there are still no answers from the Government on a sustainable post-COVID capital funding deal. This political short-termism is not the way to support a multibillion-pound organisation that is so critical to the capital and the UK as a whole.

Elly Baker: Thank you, Mr Mayor. It sounds like I share your concern about the level of interference that there has been over the last two years through COVID and related to the short-term funding deals in the detail of the operation and planning of London’s transport. I want to ask you a couple of specifics around it.
In the last short-term deal, the Government said it was willing to consider a longer capital settlement for TfL for a period of one to three years and it was due to provide an outline proposal by today, I believe. Firstly, have you received that proposal yet? Secondly, is it right that decisions to the level of whether we are going to have a Docklands Light Railway (DLR) extension or whether we are going to buy more electric buses for London are decided effectively in Whitehall and not at City Hall?

Sadiq Khan: No, we have not had the outline offer from the Government in relation to the long-term capital deal, whether it is one year going up to three years or not, but you are right. We cannot have TfL being micromanaged by the Prime Minister’s special adviser - if he wants to run TfL, he should stand for office, not whisper into the ear of the Prime Minister - or by civil servants in the Department for Transport (DfT) who do not really know how our city runs. It is important for them to allow us to run TfL with a really experienced Commissioner who knows what he is doing. When you compare and contrast what the DfT is doing around the country with some of its projects, I know whom I would rather trust running TfL in London.

Elly Baker: Thank you for that. Related to that, we had a recent report from the Transport Committee regarding the Williams-Shapps report on the future of rail and how it affected London. In that recent report the GLA Conservatives said that they did not believe that now would be the time to devolve mainline rail in London. What do you think of the idea that Whitehall should continue to determine how many trains and the frequency of trains that run in London, not you as Mayor of London, considering how vital suburban rail is for so many Londoners?

Sadiq Khan: Those who have lived in London for some time will have seen the massive improvements made to London Overground since we took over under the franchise system the running of London Overground, if you remember that east London corridor around Shoreditch, if you go to Dalston, if you have Surrey Quays and other parts of London which are benefiting from us running London Overground, and how we have transformed the suburban line so that it is more of a commuter line.
We do a good job. The current franchise system works. In fact, the Secretary of State wants to use the franchise system for other parts of the country. On the one hand they are emulating and copying what we are doing but not giving us the promise they made. By the way, the promise made in 2015 was for us to be given these commuter trains but the Government reneged on that promise well before the pandemic.

Elly Baker: Thank you.

Crime against London’s LGBT+ community

Nicholas Rogers: Can you update me on recent actions you have taken in relation to tackling crime against London’s LGBT+ community?

Sadiq Khan: The findings of the recent inquest into the victims of StephenPort [convicted murderer] were shocking and have deeply impacted the LGBT community. In response, I asked Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) to conduct an independent inspection into the MPS investigations. I have also met with Baroness [Louise] Casey [of Blackstock] whose review into the culture of the MPS includes looking at issues of misogyny, sexism, racism and homophobia.
Public trust in the police has been severely damaged and must be urgently rebuilt. I will ensure the MPS is held to account on its work to improve inclusion, diversity and engagement through its Strategy for Inclusion, Diversity and Engagement (STRIDE). Regular programmed boards, chaired by the Assistant Commissioner for Professionalism, are attended by senior MOPAC officers and my Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime, who holds six-weekly bilateral meetings with the Assistant Commissioner where progress against the STRIDE Strategy is discussed.
The 12 months to February2022 saw a 30% increase in reports of sexual orientation-linked hate crimes and the MPS has taken steps to improve its response to hate crime. MPS Hate Crime Outcomes and Performance Officers in every BCU work with victims most at risk of hate crime, focusing on improving investigations and ensuring victims are referred for appropriate support. Over 100 MPS LGBT Advisers engage with the relevant communities, offering internal learning and development, and provide community reassurance, building trust and confidence to report hate crime. In light of the [Stephen]Port inquest findings, the MPS and its LGBT Independent Advisory Group are currently undertaking a review of the LGBT Adviser role.
I have also increased investment to ensure that LGBT victims can access the right support. This includes over £1million throughout 2021/22 and 2022/23 to provide support for LGBT victims of domestic and sexual violence, including specialist support for LGBT victims staying in safe accommodation to help them rebuild their lives. In October2021, I launched a new Hate Crime Victims Service. This £1million service ensures that all victims of hate crime in London can access specialist support that best meets their needs and last week I announced a new £11.3million fund for domestic abuse services, which will support LGBT victims as well as others.

Nicholas Rogers: Thank you, MrMayor, for your answers and there are a few things you mentioned I will touch on. You started off talking about the StephenPort case and it is clear that that has had a significant impact on trust and confidence in the police among London’s LGBT community. We had a Transport Committee visit to Barking recently and I arrived a little early and I went to St Margaret’s Church to pay my respects to AnthonyWalgate, GabrielKovari, DanielWhitworth and Jack Taylor. I am afraid whilst I was there, standing at that church, I felt sadness and also a deep feeling of anger about the failings of the MPS investigation. You mentioned the Coroner’s report and the Coroner’s report says there were failings that came out in the hearings that were not identified in the original Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) investigation. The IOPC is currently reviewing whether it needs to reopen that investigation, as I am sure you know, and it is due - I think overdue, in fact - to announce whether or not it will be reopening. I have written to it asking it to reopen that investigation. Will you add your voice to that? Will you ask it to reopen the investigation as well?

Sadiq Khan: Firstly, let me just say that the feelings you feel and felt are not dissimilar, as you know, from the feelings felt by not just the family and friends of the four victims of StephenPort but of the members of the LGBT community. I know UnmeshDesai [AM] has raised this on a number of matters because of his experience in that part of London for obvious reasons. We have raised it with the IOPC, as with the Deputy Mayor [for Policing and Crime]. I am happy though to get an update from it in relation to them because you are right. The evidence at the inquest should prompt it into reviewing its original findings, but I am more than happy to provide you with an update subsequent to this meeting, even if it is in purdah, offline.

Nicholas Rogers: Thank you, I would appreciate that. Moving to another topic, you mentioned the additional £11.3million that will be supporting domestic abuse victims. Could you go into a bit more detail about how that will specifically be used to help LGBT domestic abuse victims?

Sadiq Khan: Of course, I can and thank you for your interest. Some of the money is going to go towards Galop to provide pan-London support through a case worker. Some of the money is going to Stonewall Housing for the provision of housing information, advice and support through every step of the LGBT victim/survivor’s journey, through every step from crisis through to recovery, ensuring they are able to live independently and can rebuild their lives. I am more than happy to write to him to give him how much money is going to each group, but we are working to make sure that some of the money is ring-fenced for this community for obvious reasons.

Nicholas Rogers: Thank you, I would appreciate that breakdown. During the pandemic, MOPAC provided emergency accommodation for LGBT domestic abuse victims, and I believe there were 129 referrals for four-bed spaces so there is a clear need there. Are there any plans to resurrect that service?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, we did provide the emergency services during the pandemic, and we did get assistance from the Home Office as well. I have not got that briefing. Again, can I take that away and come back to you? I do not want to mislead unintentionally if that is OK.

Nicholas Rogers: Yes, that would be fine. Thank you very much.

London Plan Guidance Impact

Sakina Sheikh: How have you used London Plan Guidance documents in order to improve the planning process in London and further public engagement in planning?

Sadiq Khan: London’s planning system must put sustainable development at its heart and I have recently adopted ground-breaking guidance on Whole Life-Cycle Carbon and Circular Economy Development, which will shift the dial on embodied carbon and prioritise their attention of existing buildings where this is the most sustainable and appropriate option. We have carried out public engagement on guidance that shows how urban greening can be achieved that sets out the requirements for air quality neutral and air quality positive development and that embeds sustainable transport, walking and cycling into developments and local plans.
The planning system must help tackle the housing crisis and create decent, safe homes for Londoners. That is why we have also recently carried out public engagement on four pieces of housing-related guidance, including a new set of housing design standards. We are engaging widely on new fire safety guidance, which builds on the requirement in my London Plan for all development to meet the highest standards of fire safety. These guidance documents will not just lead to better outcomes but will help get more people engaged in how our city develops. For example, the Characterisation and Growth Strategies Guidance requires local authorities to engage with communities to identify what is valued locally and to inform the vision of how the area should change. The approach to guidance is also being made more user-friendly, helping people to engage in the development of the guidance and making it more accessible for the community to use it when it is adopted. The Guidance Programme itself includes targeted engagement, reaching out to specific groups to inform relevant pieces of guidance such as the involvement of peer outreach workers in developing the Public London Charter.

Sakina Sheikh: Thanks very much, Sadiq. I have to say it has been a real pleasure to hold the Planning and Regeneration brief for the Labour Group over this past municipal year. Being able to spearhead our responses to your London Plan Guidance (LPG) consultations has been a vital learning curve to understand our London planning system better but also beginning to contemplate further improvements, which I hope I can pick up with you in the future, although I cannot quite hear myself think because there is some mumbling across the Chamber. Hopefully, that will quieten down in a moment.

Sadiq Khan: It is bad manners.

Sakina Sheikh: Yes, it is a bit rude and a bit annoying to be honest.

Sadiq Khan: Yes, I am waiting for the Deputy Chairman to step in.

Sakina Sheikh: What has become increasingly obvious to me during the process of writing the Labour Group’s consultation responses to your LPG is that with the Government being desperately slow to put any pen to paper on planning reforms, it is sort of holding us back a bit. For instance, when I was responding to the Air Quality LPG alongside the Labour Group, what became really clear to me is that we needed tougher national standards for designing environmentally sustainable homes and more investment in retrofitting and technology solutions. The Government just is not putting its money where its mouth is. What more can we do to get the Government moving on the planning reforms that we need and also particularly on, for instance, the retrofitting programme that we desperately need in London and the UK?

Sadiq Khan: Thanks for your question and the work you are doing in this area. We cannot do this ourselves and we need the Government to step up in relation to standards, national standards. Our standards are well ahead of the Government’s. We need it to bring its national standards up to our level, and some. It should be setting a net zero carbon standard and include an assessment of whole life-cycle carbon, but also, we need funding for energy efficiency programmes. It should have cut VAT yesterday in relation to people facing the bills they are expecting. I welcome the announcement it made to zero VAT in relation to some retrofit that will benefit the wealthiest who own cars as well, by the way, rather than helping the poorest Londoners who need support in relation to retrofitting.
You will be aware that a considerable amount of carbon comes from workplace and homes. We are doing what we can on transport, but without Government support we cannot really tackle workplace and homes. We need Government support there as well.

Sakina Sheikh: Yes, when it comes to the climate energy crisis, this Government talks the talk and very rarely walks the walk. Just back on to planning-- I am really sorry, AssemblyMember. Do not interrupt. It is rude.

Keith Prince: Members, yes, if we can allow the Member to ask their question, please.

Sakina Sheikh: Just back on to my final supplementary - at least we have had a little bit more decorum for this part - and back on to planning. When it comes to such vital issues like embedding the climate emergency in our planning system, we obviously want to make this as accessible for Londoners to participate in as possible. Specifically on your LPG consultations, would you consider making easy-read versions or even videos, for instance? I have become increasingly obsessed if I am honest with you about ways that we can democratise our planning system decision-making and engage more Londoners. The specific question to you is would you consider making easy-read versions and small supplementary videos so more people can engage with the planning system and specifically respond to your LPG consultations?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, I am more than happy to listen to your excellent ideas about making this more user-friendly to engage more people. I want Londoners not to just be consumers and not just citizens but active citizens and any advice you have got, I will ask my office to arrange to meet with you about ideas you have got. We have to make it as accessible as possible. The more we can energise Londoners to get engaged in this area, the more pressure there is from them, we can try to have world-leading policies. I will ask my office to go away and meet with you to discuss any ideas you have got.

Sakina Sheikh: Thank you, I look forward to that meeting.

Redbridge Roundabout

Keith Prince: Will you update me on how TfL is solving the problem of vehicles joining the Redbridge Roundabout from Redbridge Lane East?

Sadiq Khan: Thank you, Deputy Chairman. Transport for London (TfL) has made a series of improvements in the area in recent years, but the simple fact is that this is a busy roundabout and, no matter how many interventions TfL makes, congestion will be properly eased further only by a reduction in traffic using the roundabout.
Following a collision study with detailed traffic modelling work at Redbridge roundabout, a road danger reduction scheme was implemented by TfL in September2019. The scheme better directed circulatory traffic around the roundabout through improvements to the directional and lane markings and the removal of a pinch point on the south-eastern edge of the roundabout, which was implemented to improve large vehicle movements. The road was also fully resurfaced. Over several years TfL has also made a variety of changes and improvements to the traffic light timings at the roundabout in order to optimise traffic operation, including helping the egress of traffic from the borough road, Redbridge Lane East. Further changes made in 2020 have also had a positive effect on the queues on the roundabout.
This a very busy location with high levels of traffic flow. TfL’s analysis shows that the current operation of the traffic lights is optimal for one of the busiest traffic interchanges in London. TfL has examined the proposal of adding traffic signals to the Redbridge Road East arm of the roundabout, but detailed traffic modelling found that every possible scenario would lead to significant queuing and delays. There have also been calls for a major infrastructure intervention such as a flyover or underpass to relieve pressure on the roundabout. Aside from the fact that it is simply not possible while TfL remains under such acute financial strain due to the impacts of the pandemic, the solution here is not new heavy infrastructure. It is to reduce traffic.
TfL will continue to monitor traffic in this area and, as part of the commitment set out in my
Transport Strategy, is always open to discussing interventions that will improve streets for people, especially those that will promote active travel, reduce traffic volumes overall and reduce road danger for vulnerable road users. However, in the absence of a longer-term funding settlement with the Government, TfL is unable to consider or commit to further highway changes at this time.

Keith Prince: Thank you, MrMayor.

Money laundering in London

Unmesh Desai: Has the introduction of the Economic Crime Command led to an improvement in recent years in tackling those oligarchs, allies of President Putin and others who seek to use London as a location to invest money gained through corruption, tax evasion and other illegal practices in foreign countries?

Sadiq Khan: I have been clear that much more needs to be done to tackle international money laundering by oligarchs allied to Putin. The MPS collaborates with the National Crime Agency (NCA) and the Serious Fraud Office (SFO), which lead on tackling economic crime. However, to be able to respond effectively, both organisations require a major funding boost from the Government. The Government has also set out plans for the seizure of property belonging to those with the closest ties to Putin, including creating a stronger legislative framework.
I welcome the fact that Ministers are finally progressing the Economic Crime Bill to target money laundering by Russian oligarchs, but too many loopholes remain. I have been calling on the Government for years to introduce a register of overseas property ownership to clamp down on London being used for international money laundering and to help law enforcement tackle the flood of dirty money we have seen come into the UK. The MPS Economic Crime Command was created in 2019 to deliver a more effective response across all forms of financial crime, and this new model has seen some success. Cash seizures rose from £560million in 2019/20 to £734million in 2020/21 and account freezing orders issued rose as well from 184 to 336. The MPS is making good progress, but we need a funding boost for both the NCA and SFO as well as for changes in the law.

Unmesh Desai: Thank you, MrMayor. I got most of what you said, but I have got three supplementary questions. In late 2020, the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament presented its report on Russia, which predicted Unexplained Wealth Orders would fail due to an underfunding of the NCA. It felt that whilst the orders appeared to give the NCA clout, the reality was that it was highly probable that the oligarchy would have financial means to ensure that lawyers would find ways to circumvent the legislation. By contrast, the NCA, it said, lacked resources in terms of financial investigations, technical expertise and legal expertise and it felt that this must be rectified. MrMayor, do you agree with it, and do you agree with me in my campaign to clean up the City, which is in my constituency, and that we need more resources for the NCA and the MPS as well as legislative changes?

Sadiq Khan: Absolutely. The lack of Unexplained Wealth Orders should be a source of concern, and none have been obtained since the end of 2019. We have been calling for a Beneficial Owner Register that would let us know who owns the property. What excuse could there be for using shell companies, registered in tax havens? That is why we need the transparency. When
[The Rt Hon] David Cameron was Prime Minister - remember him - he promised this in 2016. There is nothing six years on.

Unmesh Desai: Thank you. Yes, I do remember David Cameron. MrMayor, my second supplementary is again about Unexplained Wealth Orders. There was much hope that these orders would go some way towards acting as a deterrent for those who seek to invest “dirty money” into the UK to buy the properties in London. These orders have unfortunately had very little success and the Government is now proposing to overhaul them as part of the Economic Crime Bill. Are you confident that this overhaul will result in stronger action?

Sadiq Khan: Not unless it closes the loopholes and not unless there are sufficient resources for the NCA and the SFO. In your first question, you talked about the resources these oligarchs close to Putin have. It is not a level playing field and the Government needs to back up any legislative changes with closing the loopholes and giving the resources to the SFO and NCA that they need.

Unmesh Desai: MrMayor, my final question is on sanctions. We have 65 more announced today, including one against the Russian Foreign Minister’s stepdaughter, who reportedly owns a £4million house in London. Legislation now is of course welcome, but schemes like the now-ended Golden Visa scheme and politicians fraternising with oligarchs - described by [The Rt Hon] Liz Truss [MP, Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs] as having Ukrainian blood on their hands - surely sends out the wrong message as we begin the long overdue process of cleaning up the city.

Sadiq Khan: Yes, but what we cannot be doing is giving credibility to oligarchs close to Putin and it is really important we act as one on this, the Government, City Hall and others as well. The Government has got to stop London being seen as a money laundering capital for these people and it is really important action is taken. Transparency International estimates £1.1billion worth of property in London is owned by people like the ones we are concerned about.

Unmesh Desai: Thank you, MrMayor.

Stop and Search

Emma Best: What do you believe the main function of stop and searches should be?

Sadiq Khan: Stop and search is an important tool for the police, particularly in the fight against violence. The MPS has my support in using these powers to keep us safe, provided they are used lawfully, proportionately and with professionalism. The primary purpose of stop and search, as set out by the College of Policing, is to enable officers to allay or confirm suspicions about individuals, without exercising their power of arrest. In London, the positive outcomes rate for all stop and search, which includes cautions, charges and arrests, is 27%. This is a 5% increase since 2020 and the highest it has been since 2018. In 2021 alone, 4,816 weapons were seized as a result of stop and searches, every seizure removing a potentially deadly weapon from our streets.
However, the debate around stop and search goes beyond these statistics. As I made clear in my Action Plan‑Transparency, Accountability and Trust in Policing, I recognise the disproportionate impact stop and search can have on some communities and that it is vital that the MPS has the trust and confidence of all Londoners. The MPS has committed to improving its practices and has put in place a Commander-led monthly Gold Group to provide strategic direction and the governance for lead officers and key stakeholders. It implemented enhanced training, which includes greater community involvement, lived experience sessions and unconscious bias training. The MPS has also strengthened the supervision of stop and search, which already requires supervisors to review stop and search records, with the addition of live observations of officers using their powers in public in quarterly reviews of officers’ body-worn video footage. Learning is then fed back to officers to improve their practice. My Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime scrutinises the monthly data and raises any concerns with senior officers. At the local level, Community Monitoring Groups also regularly dip sample stop and search records and body-worn video. There have been 91 body worn-video review sessions since September2020.
I am committed to strengthening community oversight and work is underway to overhaul community monitoring structures to ensure they are effective. I am not complacent, and understand that stop and search when done badly can deeply impact individuals and communities. I am committed to ensuring that our police service continues to be supported and held to account for fairly and effectively policing the capital, while using its powers effectively to keep Londoners safe.

Emma Best: Thank you, MrMayor. Would you agree with me that one of the main functions of stop and search should be to reduce youth violence?

Sadiq Khan: Yes.

Emma Best: Great, thank you. One of the things that I find slightly concerning is in the use of stop and search since the beginning of your Mayoralty the amount of stop and search leading to finding a weapon has decreased by almost 27%. It was already a very low number before your Mayoralty and after, at 2.6% down to 1.9%. The good news, as you would say, is that the rate of finding a weapon - positive outcomes of a search - is going up, but that rate is falling. We know that the use of stop and search has fallen and so the amount of weapons off the street as a result of stop and search has fallen.

Sadiq Khan: That is a fair summary. That is one of the reasons why we are involving the community more in relation to the use of stop and search and improving police training, but that is a fair concern you have articulated in your question.

Emma Best: Thanks, MrMayor. The other question I had was to focus really on finding weapons. We know that stop and search is very invasive and there has been some talk of scan and search technology, especially on the TfL network. There was a pilot of this in 2019. However, what I wanted to ask you was what you thought of scan and search technology, but I do not think that would be a very fair question because there has never been a review or any analysis of that pilot. Would you please look to get some analysis of that to see if it is a useful tool that we could use?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, you are right about the experience with TfL. One of the issues in relation to the body scanning technology is you have seen the issues at the airports. It is not realistic to have that sort of technology on the streets but also some of the practical issues. If you imagine the disruption to a street, the congestion it would cause people in relation to if there was that on a street. Also, how do you use that technology in relation to metal detectors and manage to stop somebody carrying a bag of cocaine, who is using it to supply and so forth? We do look at the evidence and we look at what happens around the country and around the world. There is going to still be a need for stop and search, but you are right; we should also be looking at whether there is new technology. We are using the body scanners in schools now more and more, and the arches more and more. What it does often do is lead to people avoiding the arches and so forth, but all these things have got to be kept under review, including looking at what works around the country and around the globe.

Emma Best: Thanks. Will you take that away to try and get some analysis of that 2019 pilot?

Sadiq Khan: I have got a feeling - that is just a memory - that there was some. Can I go away and if there was, I will provide it to you and if there is not, I will find out why? I just think there was, but I have not got it in my briefing if that is OK.

Emma Best: OK. In an answer to an earlier email question, there was a confirmation there is none--

Sadiq Khan: I am not saying you are wrong, but--

Emma Best: No, but if we could look into it at least, it is worth it. If we do a pilot, we should have some understanding of what--

Sadiq Khan: Yes, it was British Transport Police (BTP) and TfL, Deputy Chairman, but can I take that away and--

Emma Best: Yes, it was a combined effort involving the Home Office, too, and--

Sadiq Khan: Yes, I may be misremembering.

Emma Best: Just finally, as you mentioned it briefly, knife wands. The funding from MOPAC has fallen off for knife wands and so I went away and spoke to some schools because I wondered if that has fallen apart. They are not actually that expensive and the spending is not that high. I wondered whether it is because schools do not want to use them, and I got a positive response from many schools. Could we perhaps look to rolling out knife wands further to those schools that are interested?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, I am really happy to respond to this because we did a lot of work and SophieLinden [Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime] and LibPeck [Director, Violence Reduction Unit] did a lot of work. In relation to saying to schools, “You working with the police and having knife wands, doesn’t mean you’ll get a bad reputation”, it is a safeguarding issue and it is changing the mindset of heads who may think they are worried about their school being labelled - we know we would not do this - a “bad school” because there are School Officers and knife wands. That conversation is carrying on with the Violence Reduction Unit (VRU), but I am more than happy, Deputy Chairman, for Lib[Peck] to write to the Member. There has been some progress made. I have got to be honest the ChildQ case may lead to some retrenchment in relation to the progress we have made, but I am happy to take that away and respond to you.

Support to Ukrainian Refugees in London

Joanne McCartney: You have rightly stated that London stands in solidarity with Ukraine, and that our city stands ready to play its part in welcoming Ukrainian refugees.  What support can your office offer to Ukrainian refugees in London?

Sadiq Khan: We are watching a grave and deepening humanitarian crisis unfold in Ukraine. I know that Londoners are horrified by the actions of [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s regime. It is truly humbling to see that so many have already offered their help and support, demonstrating that our city stands with Ukraine and with tens of thousands of Ukrainians who live in the United Kingdom (UK). I heard this morning, Deputy Chairman, [Ukrainian] PresidentZelenskyy and I have no doubt that this Saturday thousands of Londoners will take to the streets to show their support during the march from Park Lane to Trafalgar Square to show their solidarity, as PresidentZelenskyy asked us to do this morning.
As countries in Europe provide sanctuary to more than 3million people fleeing the violence, in contrast the shambolic approach from the Home Office has left people unable to access visas to reach the UK. It is a source of national shame. I have been calling on our Government to provide an immediate route to safety in the UK by waiving complex visa requirements that are causing unnecessary delays and hardship and putting advice providers under incredible strain.
I am also calling on the Government to ensure that comprehensive funding is provided to local authorities and civil society, both of which will play a crucial role in delivering the high standards of safeguarding and support that will be vital to the success of the Homes for Ukraine scheme. My team will continue to work closely with civil servants, boroughs, and civil society on this as the scheme launches.
Urgent change is needed to ensure that the thousands of people currently trapped in the asylum system continue to be a priority, including those evacuated from Afghanistan who are still awaiting resettlement. It is unacceptable that thousands of vulnerable people in need of sanctuary have been accommodated in unsuitable hotel accommodation for so long.
Through the London Strategic Migration Partnership (LSMP), I bring together councils, health partners, funders and civil society to identify and address urgent issues, facilitate coordination and prepare for a large increase in arrivals. So far, our engagement has identified significant capacity issues among the organisations providing legal advice to displaced people and their families. The GLA is working to expand the scope of current programmes to meet the new needs of Ukrainians alongside our longstanding work to support migrants, refugees and people seeking asylum in our city.

Joanne McCartney: Thank you, MrMayor, and I will be joining you on the march on Saturday, as I suspect many Members of this Assembly will be. I am very glad to hear that you are urging the Government to up its game because, quite frankly, the response of our Government compared to those of our European neighbours has been shameful.
You recently wrote to us with regards to the work that your office was doing with regards to Afghan refugees. In that, you were able to waive certain restrictions and relax restrictions with regards to access to the
Adult Education Budget. Is that something that you are hoping to offer again to Ukrainian refugees?

Sadiq Khan: Yes. Just to remind colleagues, we have given those who arrived from Afghanistan free access to the training that you refer to and a waiver for family members as well. We are asking the Government to ensure Ukrainian refugees are given the same entitlements to adult education and those who want to learn English as a second language as well as the scheme you mentioned. We have not heard back from the Government yet. The good news is there is no urgent need yet but hopefully, once people start arriving, there will be a need.
We are also keen, by the way, not just on adult education but Deputy Mayor [for Business] RajeshAgrawal is working with DrDebbieWeekes-Bernard [Deputy Mayor for Communities and Social Justice] to make sure we can help link up employers also with those arriving. Many arriving will have great tech skills, software skills and so forth. For those who are ready to work, we are trying to link them up with employers who want to take them on as well.

Joanne McCartney: Good. You are obviously working with the London boroughs. What are the main concerns that they are raising with you? I have heard about lack of funding and uncertainty about funding, school places and lack of housing, for example.

Sadiq Khan: Yes. It is just worth reminding ourselves - and that is why I deliberately did so in my answer to your first question - we still have an issue in relation to finding permanent homes for those who arrived from Afghanistan. Councils are keen not to forget those who are already here and to give them the support they need.
What is clear, though, when people arrive as refugees is often they need wraparound support. They will be traumatised, suffering post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or other health issues. We need to make sure the local health system can cope with that. If they have children, we need to make sure the schools have the capacity to take on additional children. They may have additional challenges that require funding. We also have to make sure that any community where large numbers may arrive has the support to avoid any issues around community cohesion. We are asking the Government to make sure there is that wraparound support.
It is great that people are being generous and giving up rooms and so forth, but without support it could lead to real problems down the road. We are trying to coordinate with London Councils, which does a brilliant job. Also, I sit on the LSMP, making sure the Government understands some of the issues that may arise. By the way, the vast majority will come to London for obvious reasons.

Joanne McCartney: Yes, thank you very much. It is good to hear the work that you are doing.

Cost of Living Crisis

Marina Ahmad: How are you helping Londoners deal with the cost of living crisis both through direct Mayoral initiatives that support Londoners and through discussions with the Government?

Sadiq Khan: I am extremely concerned about the impact that growing cost-of-living pressures are having on Londoners, not least because I know how difficult things already are for so many. With inflation set to hit at least 8% this spring and with 50% rises in energy costs coming in April [2022], more Londoners will face an impossible choice between eating or heating their homes. This crisis poses a significant risk to London’s social and economic recovery from the pandemic and that is before the inflationary impacts of the invasion of Ukraine and the necessary sanctions on Russia are factored in.
In next year’s budget I am investing £3.7million in work to help raise awareness of financial, welfare and debt support and boost the capacity of advice providers to meet demand. This is on top of the £1.7million I have already invested in partnerships delivering community-based welfare advice through the Robust Safety Net recovery mission. I have recently funded Debt Free London to operate its free debt advice helpline 24 hours a day, seven days a week, until the end of May [2022]. I am also helping Londoners reduce their fuel bills and energy debts through my £40million Warmer Homes Programme and the Warmer Homes Advice Service.
I will keep doing all I can, but ultimately the levers to fully address the crisis are at national level. The Chancellor should have used the Spring Statement yesterday to ensure that welfare benefit payments increase in line with inflation and to scrap the planned increase in National Insurance contributions from April [2022]. The Warm Home Discount should be extended so that at least everyone who receives Universal Credit is entitled to it. Value added tax (VAT) on energy bills should be reduced immediately and households should not have to repay the £200 loan while energy bills are still rising. The Government should invest in multiyear energy efficiency programmes to support low-income households to reduce their energy use, which is the only sustainable way to reduce bills in the long term. To help renters stay in their homes, the Government should give me the powers to freeze private rents in London.

Marina Ahmad: MrMayor, thank you very much for the answer. I would like to pick up on something that you said. You have talked about the choice between heating and eating. I would like to let you know that we are actually now beyond that as well. That is the reality for many people but some of my constituents in Lambeth and Southwark have approached me to tell me that as parents they are now missing out on meals so that they can feed their children. I know that you will agree with me that that is completely unacceptable in the society we live in today.
MrMayor, we are seeing the biggest drop in living standards since the 1950s and a Spring Statement from a Chancellor who chose not to address this. How much impact do you think a five pence reduction in fuel duty - remembering that the average cost at the pump yesterday for a litre of unleaded was £1.67 - and a tax cut in two years’ time will have on Londoners who are struggling to feed their families right now?

Sadiq Khan: Firstly, thanks for raising this important issue and giving voice to those who often do not have a voice. It is really important. If you get a chance, it is worth listening to a caller who rang in to LBC [radio station] yesterday, heart-breaking to listen to, telling the Chancellor just what she was doing to cope. She said it in the present tense, not future tense.
On this five pence reduction in fuel duty, which I welcome, the cost increase has gone up more than five pence in the last couple of weeks anyway. That is number one. Number two is almost half of Londoners do not own a car and so this will not help the people who need the help the most. What the Chancellor could have done was to increase welfare benefits by at least inflation because, if inflation at the moment 8% and is going to go to 10% shortly but welfare benefits are going up by only 3%, you are already behind in relation to meeting your everyday needs. That is aside from the other challenges you face.
It really is offensive, the response yesterday, bearing in mind the scale of the challenge we face. Today’s newspapers - let us be frank, newspapers often sympathetic to the party to which the Chancellor belongs - speak volumes. It usually takes three or four days for a budget to unravel. This one unravelled within minutes.

Marina Ahmad: Thank you, MrMayor. Let us hope the Chancellor is listening but I will not hold my breath on that one.

Updating your Housing Strategy

Siân Berry: Is your Housing Strategy from 2018 still fit for purpose and when will you update it?

The Mayor: Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): The London Housing Strategy was published in May 2018 following extensive consultation. My team is now focused on the action needed to deliver it. The Strategy is kept under review, and I am satisfied that it remains the best diagnosis of the challenges London faces and the correct response to overcoming them.
The London Housing Strategy sets out my five priorities for housing: buildings homes for Londoners, delivering genuinely affordable homes, high quality homes and inclusive neighbourhood, a fairer deal for private renters and leaseholders, tackling homelessness and rough sleepers. These remain my priorities. My housing team is focused on delivery against these. I want them to be able to commit their full resource to doing so.
I am proud of the progress we have already made, including support in a renaissance in council home building, which has now seen over 11,000 City Hall funded council homes started since 2018, ensuring that the 2021-2026 Affordable Homes Programme will be majority social rent, delivering the land fund to allow us to intervene more directly in housing delivery, successfully pushing the Government to take action to improve security for renters and address building safety, implementing a landmark resident ballot requirement to improve estate regeneration, and ensuring that all rough sleepers had a safe place to stay during the pandemic.
My Housing Strategy has enabled me to tackle the root causes of the challenges London faces, while also adapting quickly to change in circumstances. The work required to remediate building safety failings has been more extensive than we could have envisaged in 2018. The Strategy’s focus on high quality homes and a fair deal for leaseholders has provided a fair foundation. We have been able to react to events, including flexing our right to buy back offer for councils to support the humanitarian response to the Afghanistan evacuation. There is undoubtedly more to do.
Increasing supply is the central pillar of my Strategy. This has been made more challenging due to the pressures created by building safe during remediation, the need to retrofit homes to support our moves towards net zero, and soaring costs owed to the macro-economic situation. I will continue to do everything in my power, but the Government needs to step up properly to properly fund housing in London and support our recovery.
Siân Berry AM: Thank you very much, MrMayor, for that detailed response, talking about the actions you are taking, and the policy changes you have made since the Housing Strategy first came out. The breadth of all of that, ultimately just provides more evidence for my original question, that your Housing Strategy is now out of date and does need an update. I want to pick up, particularly on overcrowding, because this is a topic the Housing Committee investigated in its meeting in January. We heard evidence of the causes behind overcrowding, its extent, the consequences, and the lack of data. We have produced recommendations, which we have sent you. I do not want to pre-empt your response to the recommendations officially, but it was very clear from the investigation that overcrowding is becoming even more of a serious problem for Londoners. The DeputyMayor for Housing told us at the meeting that overcrowding worsened during the pandemic perhaps to as high as 15% in London. We can contrast that with the baseline figure for overcrowding shown in your current Housing Strategy Implementation Plan, which was only 7.5% in 2015. I do not need to tell you how overcrowding exacerbated the pandemic and made the impacts of it worse on some parts of the population. This change of circumstance on its own, does that not warrant a review and a new Housing Strategy, particularly given the main recommendation from the Housing Committee was an Overcrowding Action Plan.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I am unclear how a family living in overcrowded accommodation is assisted by a new document presented by City Hall. The Strategy is there. Rather than officer time being spent writing a new Strategy, we have to deliver on the Strategy by working with the Government to make sure more affordable homes are built for families. In addition to the Housing Strategy, we have the London Plan, we have the Design Codes, the supplementary planning guidance (SPG), we now have funding from the Government, working with councils to ‑‑ I was in Enfield this week, three-bedroom homes. Small families can move into them from overcrowded accommodation. The issue is the funding to build the homes we need. We have a London Plan, which makes it quite clear the number of homes we need. We also require councils to assess the demand for family-sized homes in their borough. The issue is the support for those councils building the family homes. Also, we now have a London Plan that requires developers to ensure a percentage is genuinely affordable. I am unclear how officer-time being spent writing a new Strategy addresses those issues.
Siân Berry AM: We do think there are gaps. We will, again, hopefully this week, be writing to you about other issues around potentially having non-construction ways of introducing new homes. That is not covered in your current Housing Strategy. One thing, a lot of targets in your current Housing Strategy are set for 2021. This does line up with the Affordable Homes Programme that originally ran from 2016 to 2021. You have mentioned you have a new Affordable Homes Programme which runs to 2026. It must be time for new targets and a new Housing Strategy to back it up. You have redone the Police and Crime Plan from 2017, so surely you would redo the 2018 Housing Strategy next and start on that quite soon.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): The logic of that means we would also have a new London Plan.
Siân Berry AM: I would not mind that either. You know I was not completely happy with the London Plan or the Housing Strategy. You must be thinking about this.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): That means two and a half years of officer-time and money doing a new London Plan rather than delivering on the London Plan that we have, which is bold, world-leading in relation to our expectations, and it is leading to a situation where 13% of new homes were affordable with a dodgy definition of the previous guy, and it is now 40% with a stricter definition, where it is genuinely affordable.
Siân Berry AM: You know that we think, and I think that there are gaps to fill, and at the very least for the London Plan some early alterations would be a really useful thing to see. I genuinely think the Housing Strategy needs a review. It needs reprioritising towards things we can do without building, as well as building. The Kerslake Review has come out. You have a new DeputyMayor [for Housing and Residential Development], TomCopley, he might have some more progressive ideas. He wants to put his stamp on the old Strategy. I will keep pressing you for this in that case. I was hoping for a yes today.
Keith Prince AM (Deputy Chairman in the Chair): I am afraid, AssemblyMember, you are out of time.
Siân Berry AM: Thank you very much.

Reforming the police

Caroline Russell: Who will lead the process of reform of the Metropolitan Police Service, Londoners or the police?

Sadiq Khan: Policing London is a huge responsibility and a great challenge, and it is important that we recognise all those officers who work so tirelessly to keep us safe. However, the MPS has experienced a series of deeply troubling issues that must not be ignored, and it is clearer than ever that the organisation is in need of reform.
BaronessLouiseCasey [of Blackstock] has begun her independent review into culture and standards within the MPS. The Rt Hon DameElishAngiolini QC has also started her independent inquiry into the death of SarahEverard. I fully endorse and support their important work. The MPS itself must develop with Londoners an urgent plan to rebuild the trust and confidence of the people they serve and to root out the racism, sexism, homophobia, bullying, discrimination, and misogyny that clearly still exists within the force.
The recruitment process for the new Commissioner [of Police of the Metropolis] is led by the Home Secretary in consultation with me as Mayor of London. It is important that the community has some role in the appointment process, and I will be holding discussions with the Home Office as to how this can be achieved. I have been clear with the Home Secretary that the new Commissioner must clearly demonstrate that they understand and accept the scale of the cultural problems within the MPS and the urgency with which they must be addressed. In short, they need to get it, and they need to have a proper and robust plan to deal with it.
Part of this must be a clear and deep commitment to working with communities to shape reform. I have been working hard to begin some reform of the MPS along these lines with community involvement in new recruitment pathways and community-led training for officers. I will work with the new Commissioner to deepen community involvement in policing as reform of the MPS continues at pace.
The need for reform is not simply limited to the MPS. SirTomWinsor, Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary, has stated this in his recent State of Policing report. There must be a national discussion on policing reform and this should include consideration of training, misconduct proceedings, whistleblowing structures, and the use of social media.
Ultimately, the police must be held to account by the public whom they serve. As the Police and Crime Commissioner I am committed to supporting the police while also challenging them to improve, holding them to account and ensuring Londoners receive the police service they deserve.

Caroline Russell: Thank you, MrMayor. I am particularly interested in how Londoners fit in here. People I speak with are shocked and horrified by the continuing stream of disgraceful revelations about the culture in the MPS and the behaviour of some officers. These revelations have just kept coming. Rather than welcoming them as evidence of rooting out the bad apples and even the bad barrels, the communication from the MPS has felt defensive, which appears to have worsened trust and confidence. This goes beyond the need to simply change the Commissioner.
I understand that you have consulted with a few thousand Londoners out of 10million on your
Police and Crime Plan, but do you agree there is still an urgent need to get Londoners more on board so that they can contribute to establishing what policing by consent looks like in a diverse city like London with our inclusive values?

Sadiq Khan: You raise a number of issues and I know time is short and so I will try to address them briefly.
Although more than 4,000 responded to the Police and Crime Plan, we consulted widely. It is really important to understand the impact the top has on the ethos and values of an organisation, including comms, from the MPS.
What you are highlighting is the need for the new Commissioner to what I call ‘get it’. That includes taking on board your concerns as an experienced elected politician who speaks regularly on a daily basis to Londoners who are concerned. Londoners are pro police, but they need their police to understand there are challenges. We are not a perfect police service, and we need to address that.

Caroline Russell: Yes, we know that there are so many Londoners - Black Londoners, lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGBT) Londoners and women - who have lost trust and confidence in a really fundamental way, particularly over these last weeks.
Earlier on as well as yesterday at the PCC, AssemblyMemberMoema raised the case of ChildQ and the need for the MPS to work with local groups like Hackney Account whose work I have raised with you earlier on in this Assembly term. They have been highlighting the problems with disproportionality in stop and search, let alone strip search. You need to be working more with groups like them.
Your press release this morning said that you and the Commissioner would drive the cultural change and the reforms that are needed. You consulted people on the Police and Crime Plan, but you did not consult them on reform. Do you agree that we need Londoners to lead a conversation about what policing by consent means in our city?

Sadiq Khan: That is not true, though, is it? The action plan in the summer that GeorgeFloyd was killed had a wide consultation and engagement with community groups across London including in Hackney. It is important to give credit where it is due. DrDebbieWeekes-Bernard [Deputy Mayor for Communities and Social Justice] and Sophie Linden [Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime] spent weeks going across London, speaking to, listening to and engaging with community groups. The action plan on accountability, transparency and trust in policing was developed after extensive consultation with community groups virtually and in person. It does nobody any favours with sweeping generalisations that simply are not true.

Caroline Russell: MrMayor, obviously there is good work going on, but what I am talking about is a really sweeping step change in approach to working with the communities in London who have experienced disproportionality and have lost the trust and confidence in the police. I hope that you see that it is not just about who leads the MPS but about a need to reset that relationship between Londoners and the people who are policing us.

Sadiq Khan: I accept that and that is one of the reasons why I do not accept that it is a few rotten apples or a few wrong ones. There are deep cultural issues that demand change. Again, the Chair of the Metropolitan Police Federation may not like it, but that is one of the reasons why I lost confidence in the Commissioner.

Caroline Russell: Thank you. I look forward to that deep conversation with Londoners because it is really needed. I have no further questions.

Sadiq Khan: Thank you.

Awareness of Air Pollution in London

Hina Bokhari: Are you confident that Londoners are fully aware of the effects of air pollution?

Sadiq Khan: Since first being elected, I have made tackling and raising awareness of air pollution a priority. Unlike when I was first elected in 2016, polling now consistently shows that over three quarters of Londoners understand that air pollution is a problem in London.
In 2016 I introduced London’s first alert system to warn Londoners about air pollution episodes. Alerts are displayed across the public transport and road networks, shared on social media, and sent directly to over 3,000 schools and all London boroughs. On Tuesday I used this system to issue a high air pollution alert for yesterday and today as London is currently being affected by pollution from the Continent alongside a build-up of local emissions. The London Resilience Forum now also cascades the alerts to its network, which includes emergency responders, transport providers, the National Health Service (NHS), London boroughs, and our faith, business, voluntary and community sectors.
London now has the world’s largest air quality monitoring network. As part of this, I funded the Breathe London network of low-cost sensors to provide user-friendly information and there are now nearly 300 sensors across London, including at hospitals, schools and sites chosen by community groups and London boroughs. Live data from all monitors in London is available through the Breathe London website, providing Londoners for the first time with easy access to reliable, real-time air quality data right down to the level of their street, school or home.
I have also commissioned and publicised ground-breaking research, which is used to raise awareness of the health impacts of pollution and the need for action. One issue our research shows Londoners are less clear on is the impacts of woodburning on air quality, and so I have used my social media channels during the colder months to raise awareness and I am working on finessing this messaging for next winter. My officers have also helped to secure £300,000 of Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) funding to quantify and raise awareness of the impacts of woodburning with the research element of this work getting underway next month.
The recent Clean Air and Health Summit I convened was a huge success, with the health and care system committing to amplify messaging on the need to improve air quality and tackle health inequalities, a commitment reiterated at the London Health Board.

Hina Bokhari: Thank you. Last month you told me:
“Current public messaging does not strike the right balance between providing health guidance to those most vulnerable to pollution and encouraging all Londoners to adapt their behaviours to reduce pollution.”
I really welcomed the press statement on Tuesday night informing people of high levels of pollution and urging Londoners to look after each other by choosing to walk, cycle, use public transport and avoid car journeys that are unnecessary, idling and burning wood.
Are you acknowledging now that public messaging should be about taking action to prevent air pollution, not just expecting vulnerable people to hide from it?

Sadiq Khan: The problem with the premise in that question is “acknowledging now”. I am the guy who implemented the biggest air quality network system in the world and the air quality alerts. It is not new because of a Liberal Democrat intervention. It is because we did this in 2016 because it was the right thing to do. Anybody who reads the outcome of the summit we recently held will have seen the progress made persuading health practitioners to also play their role. I appreciate allies joining the campaign and I look forward to the Liberal Democrats playing a more active role going forward as well.

Hina Bokhari: We need people to trust the evidence on air pollution. On 12 and 13January [2022] you issued a moderate pollution alert for 13 and 14January, but on 13January Defra issued a very high pollution alert for 14January. It is all very confusing for the public. It might be a reason why there are still people who are just ignoring the advice not to idle, drive or burn wood.
What progress has been made to review the trigger levels for high pollution alerts? Will you commit to publishing the outcome for this review?

Sadiq Khan: Again, this is already in train. I know the danger of the Liberal Democrats claiming victory over something we have already agreed to do and so, just to explain, the alert we use from London looks at three different datasets including the Defra dataset and the Met Office model alongside the Network of Excellence in Air Quality (NExAir) at Imperial College. The Defra dataset is different and relies upon one data source.
As a consequence of the Air Quality and Health Summit that I chaired - not on the recommendation of the Liberal Democrats - we made a number of recommendations and one of them was to have a better system of making the information available to the public. We agreed that the Greater London Authority (GLA) will conclude its review of alerts messaging in London within the next six months, engaging with Defra to ensure a consistent national approach.

Hina Bokhari: Rosamund [Kissi-Debrah], as you know, the mother of nine-year-old Ella who died of a severe asthma attack in 2013, said that before her daughter’s death she was not aware of just how dangerous air pollution is. Everyone needs to be fully aware of the levels of air pollution in every part of London. Therefore, Londoners need and deserve targeted air pollution alerts for real behaviour change. The London Air and Breathe London websites feature London’s air monitoring network but have many gaps. Many roads are not covered, especially in outer London.
Will you commit to improving current provision for air pollution monitors, especially on TfL routes, and will you also look into making sure there is proper monitoring on all access roads, including the Silvertown Tunnel?

Sadiq Khan: Firstly, it was me as the Mayor who helped Rosamund get the fresh inquest because she was not satisfied with the first inquest. I wrote to the Attorney General. I worked closely with Professor [Sir] StephenHolgate [CB, Imperial College London] to make sure we shared all the information we had. One of the things I discovered during the first few weeks of being Mayor was that a report had been done by the previous Mayor that had been buried away which showed just what you are saying. At the time, we knew that there was air pollution from local roads. You will remember that Rosamund lives near the
South Circular. That is one of the reasons why we think that the alert system is so important and real-time information is so important with the air quality sensors we have across London.
I am happy to send you - because we are in danger of going in circles, DeputyChairman - the six different actions from the London Clean Air and Health Summit, which will address the question, which may have been superseded by what was agreed at the London Clean Air and Health Summit.

Keith Prince: Thank you, MrMayor. I am afraid the Liberal Democrats are out of time.

Levelling Up White Paper, Health Inequalities Implementation Plan and Tackling Structural Inequalities

Onkar Sahota: Do you think that the Government’s Levelling Up White Paper has too much of a focus on geographical inequalities, when it should also address structural and ethnic inequalities, for the benefit of London, as your Health Inequalities Strategy Implementation Plan does?

Sadiq Khan: I welcome the Levelling Up White Paper, but it does not provide the whole solution to the problems it seeks to address. While the Government rightly outlines historic under-investment in the Midlands and the North, it fails to address the need to level up within regions as well as between them. It does not estimate the level of investment needed across the country to achieve its aim, let alone provide meaningful funding. Its devolution framework tweaks the status quo, rather than offering radical change, and there is nothing to say about Government’s ambitions for London.
London has some of the highest levels of deprivation in the country, 27% of Londoners who were living in relative poverty even before the pandemic hit and the poverty rate of Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people is nearly twice that of white people. The Government’s Levelling Up Advisory Council must now work with all parts of London’s government and communities to understand the reality of deprivation here and our structural and ethnic inequalities mean that some Londoners are at much greater risk of poor outcomes, including in health. This is clearly set out in my Health Inequalities Strategy, with the implementation plan highlighting the need to focus on ethnic inequalities, including those caused by structural and income inequalities alongside other drivers of health inequalities. The Government’s recent response on the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities recommendations confirmed its plans for a new White Paper on Health Disparities, which I hope will focus on tackling the deep inequalities in health of different communities, including in London.

Onkar Sahota: Thank you for that response, MrMayor. One of the inequalities, of course, is overcrowding and poor housing, underlying deep health inequalities in the capital, as has been exposed by the pandemic. Are you concerned about the Government’s plans to move much-needed housing investment away from London as part of its Levelling Up White Paper?

Sadiq Khan: Of course, I am, and what it leads to is me repeating that you do not make a country more equal by making them poorer. You will see every day, not just as a Member of this Assembly but as a general practitioner (GP), the consequences of overcrowding. We saw it evidenced with this pandemic, particularly in those communities where there is overcrowding, but it has an impact on a whole host of other issues as well.
We need people to have decent-sized homes, good quality homes and that is why we are lobbying the Government, not just for changes in legislation in relation to action against private landlords but also to make sure we have got the funding to build the family-sized homes that are genuinely affordable that Londoners need.

Onkar Sahota: Thank you. The other thing of course you touched upon is that the BAME community was more adversely affected, and this is also true in terms of the sharp end of the climate emergency and your data has shown that the BAME community is affected more adversely by poor air quality. Do you think that the Government’s refusal to back a national scrappage scheme and properly fund TfL is hampering your efforts to address the issues of improving air quality in London and particularly for the BAME communities?

Sadiq Khan: Yes. One of the things the Government wanted me to do last year was to take away free travel for children and it also wanted me to take away free travel for those above the age of 60. We managed to resist it, but that just shows it does not understand the difference good public transport has on the quality of lives of poorer people. That is why it is really important to continue to try to persuade the Government, not just for a long-term deal for TfL but to give us financial support to have policies that address the air quality. That includes a scrappage scheme to assist those people to transition from polluting vehicles to other forms of transport, whether it is a cleaner vehicle or going towards using more public transport and so forth.

Onkar Sahota: Thank you, MrMayor.

Improving Sanction Detection and Conviction Rates

Krupesh Hirani: Sanction detections and convictions for crime have fallen on the whole across the country and the situation in London is no different. Rape, sexual assault, and also child sexual abuse convictions have fallen particularly steeply in recent years. What are the top measures you would like to see the Government introduce in order to improve sanction detection and conviction rates in London, and to let criminals know they aren’t going to get away with serious crimes that ruin the lives of victims?

Sadiq Khan: There are many factors that contribute to successful detection and conviction from initial investigations through to an efficient and timely journey through the courts. Every step of the process has been made harder by a decade of Government austerity. The police lost thousands of officers and staff, including experienced, skilled detectives, and the justice system is in crisis with nearly 16,000 Crown Court cases waiting to be heard in London alone.
We must also acknowledge that trust and confidence is fundamental to the effectiveness of our police and justice system. Without it, fewer victims will come forward and fewer citizens will provide vital intelligence to help prevent, solve and prosecute crime. I have done everything in my power to address these issues: record investment in police and victim services, the appointment of London’s first independent Victims’ Commissioner and decisive action to address decline in public confidence in policing. My Police and Crime Plan sets out my expectation that sanction detection rates increase along with the action needed to support this. I will hold the MPS Commissioner to account for improving police investigation and will continue to press justice partners to make similar improvements in their work. The Government must produce a properly funded plan to ensure all parts of the criminal justice system focus on addressing what are unacceptably low detection, prosecution and conviction rates. Most urgently, the Government must allocate some of the expanded Nightingale Court capacity that London so desperately needs to create a dedicated rape offences court.
Krupesh Hirani AM: Thank you for addressing the points on the MPS as well, because clearly the MPS has a key role to play locally in improving conviction rates. A recent inspection into the Criminal Prosecution Service (CPS) in south London found that only 40% of the files submitted by the MPS to the CPS fully met the national file standard for rape and sexual offences; 70% of the files looked at did not even meet the standard. The report also noted that the feedback from the CPS to the MPS to help to improve them is inadequate.
Given rape charges have fallen to a pitiful 1.3% nationally, and reported sexual offences are at the highest levels on record, criminals under this Government are literally getting away with murder. What needs to be done to rectify this issue?

Sadiq Khan: The starting point was an acknowledgement by the Government in the form of the JusticeSecretary and HomeSecretary apologising for the appalling conviction rates in relation to rape. We are now starting to see an uplift in officers, but we need to make sure the whole criminal justice system understands this issue and has the support and resources, after 12 years of cuts, to address this. You cannot not expect consequences when officers are going down, experience is being lost, tax is being lost, the CPS is having cuts, courts are closing down, Crown Court and Magistrates Court, and then be surprised when there are the problems that you have articulated in your question. We need to make sure the right policies are in place. We need to make sure the right resources are in place. We need to make sure there is the right training in place to address these issues. It is shocking that you have victims of rape not wanting to go ahead and report it, because they have no confidence that action will be taken to make sure justice occurs. That means the perpetrator, as you said, is getting away with it and is committing more crime.
Krupesh Hirani AM: Thank you, MrMayor. The Government has not only been soft on crime by taking £1billion out of London’s policing since 2020, but was also soft on the causes of crime by cutting local authorities who provide many of the services that are proven to have an impact on long-term crime as well. Indeed, many members of the Government are currently having to spend their own time answering police questionnaires, so there could be a conflict of interest if they were to be tougher on crime. The Government has decided against being tougher on those who commit violence against women, in particular, by going against introducing misogyny as a hate crime, which could have been used to lead to longer sentences. Do you think the Government has been tough enough on reforming prison sentences in recent years and will you reconfirm your commitment to supporting misogyny as a hate crime?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Misogyny should be recorded as a hate crime. There needs to also be changes in relation to making the harassment of women in a public place a criminal offence. There should be longer sentences for those convicted of serious violent and sexual offenders. It is really important. The criminal justice system, when it comes to sentencing, should both punish and reform. That means not using prisons as warehouses where people convicted just sit around 23hours a day, in the University of Crime. We need to make sure that prison does both those of those things. You cannot be surprised after 12years of cuts in the prison service, the probation service, in courts, in police, in the CPS that you have a situation where crime has gone up in the numbers it has. From City Hall we do what we can, with record funding for the police and preventative services. You will be aware, as a former councillor in Brent, the consequences of the number of years of cuts to great local authorities like Brent in relation to your ability to provide preventative services. It is really important that people realise that cuts have consequences. You have articulated some of those consequences.
Krupesh Hirani AM: Thank you, Mayor.

Working with communities in London

Shaun Bailey: How are you working with communities in London?

Sadiq Khan: The role of Mayor and the GLA as an organisation exists to serve London’s communities. During my time at City Hall, I have made it clear that everything we do must be in partnership with Londoners, rooted in the daily reality and lived experiences of our communities. This is the only way we can truly help to improve Londoners’ quality of life and tackle the barriers and challenges that so many face.
One of the ways I have worked to achieve this is by making significant funding available to support the charity and voluntary sectors, which have such a wealth of knowledge about how best to support Londoners but have been starved of investment from the Government since 2010. Over the last few years, I have invested more than £100million in this support. That includes £17million for young people and £13million to support communities responding to COVID. I have also ensured that London’s diverse communities are at the heart of decision-making, prioritising proper representation on all major boards, including the London Recovery Board, Skills for London Board and the Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Advisory Group.
In addition to these formal channels, my teams are continuously working on new methods of bringing grass roots perspectives into decision-making, whether that is through our public engagement platform, Talk London, or by supporting peer research. Most recently, my Skills Team carried out peer research to develop the Skills Roadmap for London. This helped ensure we are designing and promoting an adult skills offer that is inclusive and responsive to the multiple and complex needs of our city. My Deputy Mayor for Communities and Social Justice also regularly hosts meeting with communities, so they have access to the latest information and guidance. Just last week, she hosted a briefing on the cost of living crisis with leading charities, attended by over 120 people. Over the past 18 months, she has hosted a monthly Public Health Briefing with the UK Health Security Agency’s Professor Kevin Fenton and NHS England’s Martin Machray. The Building Strong Communities London Recovery Board mission is ensuring communities are supported to develop skills and networks to be in the best place to deliver for London and I have worked with the City Bridge Trust to invest almost £2million in civil society support through the Civil Society Roots Programme. This is an ongoing priority for me, and I will continue to support London’s diverse communities in every way I can.

Shaun Bailey: Good afternoon, MrMayor.

Sadiq Khan: Hi.

Shaun Bailey: Thank you for that answer. Do you see any value in Safer Neighbourhood Boards? Recently, we had a motion go through unanimously, calling on yourself to support Safer Neighbourhood Boards more and recognise the good work they do. Again, do you see any value in these Boards?

Sadiq Khan: Yes. Generally, speaking, yes. Some are good, some are excellent, some are not so great, but yes, as a general way of engaging with the community, I do.

Shaun Bailey: Well, can you then go back to MOPAC and ask it why it does not? For instance, your [Police and] Crime Plan talks a lot about engagement but does not mention the words “Safer Neighbourhood Boards” once. Many Safer Neighbourhood Boards will talk about the fact that MOPAC is very hard to work with. Funding that is promised to them does not come in a timely fashion. The first thing I will ask is: can you go back and make sure that these things are taken care of?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, of course, I can take that away.

Shaun Bailey: OK.

Sadiq Khan: I will write to the Member to give a response to his point.

Shaun Bailey: OK, because the deeper thing is I have written to SophieLinden [Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime] now a number of times about the Safer Neighbourhood Boards and she has come back with some underwhelming responses. The real worry here is people are under the impression that MOPAC is going to run Safer Neighbourhood Boards into the ground by not supporting them properly. The funding is there, you have committed the funding, but it does not provide it in a timely fashion. They are worried that it is going to run them into the ground. Can you give us an assurance that is not the case?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, that is not the intention, but let me take away what you have said in relation to the lack of support you are saying some Boards feel and let us see what we can do to address that. They have got an important role to play and, as I said, some are excellent, some are good, some are less good. The more support we give them the more that can be good or excellent, is it not?

Shaun Bailey: Thank you for that. The three things I believe they had asked for are greater flexibility around how the funding is provided, what it can be used for, the funding to arrive on time and also for MOPAC to just attend meetings and give them more airtime because they are very worried that they are being
side-lined. Again, the Police and Crime Plan talks about engagement but does not talk about
Safer Neighbourhood Boards and they took this as quite a worrying sign.

Sadiq Khan: OK. Can I take that away and come back to you on that?

Shaun Bailey: Thank you.

Impact of ULEZ expansion and road charging

Peter Fortune: Recognising that you believe the expansion of the ULEZ – and, in the future, road user charging - will benefit Londoners due to improving air quality, how will you ensure that the financial impact of these schemes does not hit the poorest the hardest?

Sadiq Khan: I have asked TfL to consult on expanding the ULEZ London-wide to extend the huge air quality benefits of the scheme. While I have done a great deal to clean up London’s air over the last six years and support poor Londoners to make the transition, there are still nearly 4,000 premature deaths a year linked to poor air quality with the majority of those in outer London. Crucially, there has been a slower rate of improvement in air quality in outer London, where 300,000 people have asthma, than in inner London. The ULEZ is getting the most polluting vehicles off our streets and early assessments indicate that extending it London-wide would lead to a further reduction of around 10% in nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions from cars and vans in outer London, improving on the 30% reduction expected from the expanded ULEZ and tighter Low Emission Zone standards. Expanding London-wide would also reduce carbon dioxide emissions in outer London and further reduce the number of most polluting cars on London’s roads.
The rising cost of living was a key consideration for me in making the decision to move ahead to consultation on the proposal. At a time when people’s budgets are under pressure, I am not willing to ask people to pay more unless I am absolutely convinced it is justified to protect the health of Londoners. By using the ‘polluter pays’ principle to target the scheme at the most harmful journeys, this is the scheme that will provide the biggest improvement in health with the smallest impact on Londoners’ pockets. Nearly half of Londoners do not own a car. This is also a matter of social justice as low-income Londoners, who bear the brunt of toxic emissions, are the least likely to own one. What is more, thanks to improvements in technology and the wider influence of the existing ULEZ, 82.5% of cars in outer London are already ULEZ-compliant, meaning their owners would not be subject to any additional charge.
I am also proposing to introduce the biggest scrappage scheme feasible to help Londoners on low incomes, disabled Londoners, charities and businesses. The £61million we provided for scrappage associated with the existing ULEZ was provided entirely without Government support in contrast to other UK cities, which have received millions from the Government. I would welcome the Member’s support in making the case to the Government to provide funding for a scrappage scheme to support Londoners this time around.

Peter Fortune: Thank you very much, MrMayor. I phrased the question very carefully and so, for the benefit of the tape, I recognise that there are the air quality improvements that you are driving for, but the question was specifically about the financial impact. I did word that in the question.
Just so you know, I spoke with TfL on Monday, and they are going to come back with some modelling about the air quality in outer London. I want to do my homework and I want to understand it.
It is the financial impact that I want to focus on, and the question asks: how will you ensure that the financial impact of these schemes does not hit the poorest the hardest?

Sadiq Khan: There will be an Integrated Impact Assessment which will look into the sorts of issues we are talking about, the equality and economic impacts, and I can ask TfL to also brief you on that as well. It is similar to the assessment we did - obviously a different area - in relation to both the central and inner London ULEZ, looking into a whole host of issues that TfL can explain to you.
That is one of the reasons to address any adverse economic consequences and why we would have the widest possible scrappage scheme and why in my answer I ask for your help in relation to persuading the Government not to treat London differently and not to be anti-London, and to give us some of the support it is giving other parts of the country to ameliorate some of the consequences economically for those who may suffer adversely because of the ULEZ expanding.

Peter Fortune: I will advocate for my residents wherever that needs to happen. Around those financial impacts, residents have been in touch with me. This is a really big issue of concern for them as it was when there was the extension to the North and South Circulars that we talked about. They are really worried about how it is going to impact them visiting friends and family and getting to work. Small businesses that run maybe fleets of diesel vehicles are concerned because the scrappage scheme ran out of money last time. They are really concerned to make sure it does not happen this time.
You mentioned in an answer to one of our colleagues here about half of Londoners not owning a car. Which half does not own a car?

Sadiq Khan: On average, if you look at all of London, around half of Londoners do not own a car. To give you credit, to be fair, the Conservatives have been consistently opposed to the ULEZ and consistently opposed to the central London ULEZ. You have been opposed to the inner London ULEZ and we are not surprised you are opposed to the outer London ULEZ as well. You have been consistent.
I am quite clear in relation to being consistently in favour of cleaning up the air in our city. It is an issue of social justice. Those in outer London suffer more deaths caused by poor air quality. They are older Londoners. They also are more likely to have asthma than those in central London‑‑

Peter Fortune: Just because we are going into the polemic here, the reason I asked about that‑‑

Sadiq Khan: No, it was a factual answer. It is a fact.

Peter Fortune: No, it is not. Which half of London? Camden has 34% car ownership ‑‑

Sadiq Khan: I am sorry, Deputy Chairman. In outer London, more people suffer adverse consequences from air quality‑‑

Peter Fortune: I really worded the question carefully to ask about the financial impact in terms of the expanded zone and I have really‑‑

Sadiq Khan: No, it is a fact. Do you accept it now? Do you accept as a fact that those in outer London suffer more consequences from air quality?

Peter Fortune: ‑‑ structured my supplementaries to ask more particularly about the expansion into outer London.

Sadiq Khan: Will you accept it as a fact? You said it was not a fact. It is a fact.

Peter Fortune: When I asked, the question was which half‑‑

Keith Prince: It is Mayor’s Question Time.

Sadiq Khan: Thank you. It is Mayor’s Question Time.

Peter Fortune: Thank you. If we look to Camden, you are right, Camden has 34% car ownership, Hackney has 33% car ownership, Islington has 32% car ownership. If you go to outer London, Bexley has 74% car ownership, Bromley has 75% car ownership, 75% in Havering, 74% in Kingston upon Thames and 77% in Sutton. These are figures from the Centre for London report. London is different in different parts of London and that is a case that has been made over and over again. When the ULEZ expands out to cover the whole of London, it is not the case, which is the implied suggestion, that not many people out there own cars. It is different. There is a different makeup in outer London to inner London. That comes from these figures here.
You have said a couple of times now that, again, the poorest in London do not own cars. Where do you get that data from? I have been looking very carefully for that data.

Sadiq Khan: OK. You have had three minutes to ask your question. I hope you give me the courtesy to have at least three minutes to answer.

Peter Fortune: If you could answer the question I asked, that would be very useful.

Sadiq Khan: One of the reasons why those in outer London suffer worse in relation to the consequences of air quality is they are older and, as you said, there may be more air pollution caused by the numbers of cars there. On average, car ownership in London is around half and that is leading to the premature deaths I have been talking about. One of the reasons why we are increasing bus services in outer London is because we want to improve public transport in outer London, which for too long has benefited from less good public transport. One of the reasons, for example, we were keen to have step-free access in
Harrow on the Hill was so that outer London could have the benefits of people being able to use public transport. It is a fact though. You may not like it, I do not like it, but outer London suffers worse consequences from air pollution. We have more outer Londoners who are suffering--

Peter Fortune: Mayor, I put it right at the beginning of this, the caveat that this is separating air quality from financial impact.

Sadiq Khan: I was not given three minutes then, was I?

Keith Prince: Noto be fair--

Peter Fortune: Separating air qualityfrom financial impact.

Keith Prince: Sorry, excuse me. To be fair, MrMayor, he is quite specific on his question. We have given you quite a lot of lenience in relation to talking about air quality--

Sadiq Khan: Well, no, you have not --

Keith Prince: You are talking about air quality, but the question is quite clear andif you could either address your answer to--

Peter Fortune: I am happy to phrase the question again in case the Mayor missed it.

Keith Prince: If you would not mind, AssemblyMember.

Peter Fortune: You have said previously that the poorest in London do not own cars. My question is - because I have looked for it and I am trying to find that data - where do you source that data from?

Sadiq Khan: Can I just be clear? You are implying the poorest do own cars?

Peter Fortune: No, I will ask again, just for your clarity. You have said many times that the poorest in London do not have cars, the implication being that when there is an expanded ULEZ zone they will not be impacted by it in terms of the financial impact. I am asking. I have gone to look for that data and I am struggling to find that data. Where do you get that data from? I want to understand your thinking.

Sadiq Khan: I am surprised that the Member’s experience of being an ex-politician does not lead him to conclude that the poorest Londoners cannot afford to own cars. I will send him evidence backing up that--

Peter Fortune: I will go and get it myself. Where does it come from?

Sadiq Khan: I will send him not just my own experience of this but examples to show that nearly half of all households in London do not have a car.

Peter Fortune: I do not need examples. It is a clearly phrased and respectful question actually. I am not disputing you. I am asking you where you got that data from so I can go and have a look at it myself.

Keith Prince: MrMayor, I probably would not expect you to know off the top of your head, but he is asking for the source. MrMayor, he is asking for the source.

Sadiq Khan: Yes, I was surprised by the proposition that poor people are less likely to have a car--

Peter Fortune: You had made that proposition. I have asked you very clearly where you get your data from so I can go and study it and have a look at it.

Sadiq Khan: OK. I am surprised by that supposition. I will make sure that officers in TfL give him the data. Maybe you should knock on a few more doors and get around London a bit more in relation to understanding--

Peter Fortune: What does that mean? You see, that was just a dig. That was a dig because you feel awkward.

Sadiq Khan: Well--

Peter Fortune: Now if you do not have the data--

Sadiq Khan: -- Deputy Chairman, let me speak.

Peter Fortune: -- you can tell me you do not have it to hand--

Sadiq Khan: I know Andrew[Boff AM, Chair] is away, but come on.

Peter Fortune: -- and I will have it, but you do not need to make digs like that. It is unbecoming of the office.

Sadiq Khan: Now--

Peter Fortune: Now I have spoken with the Office of National Statistics (ONS)--

Sadiq Khan: -- he is a BorisJohnson[Prime Minister] supporter. I have not broken--

Peter Fortune: See, again unbecoming of the office.

Sadiq Khan: -- the law recently.

Peter Fortune: I asked a respectful question and if you feel awkward--

Sadiq Khan: Well, the Deputy Chairman is not giving me a chance to respond.

Peter Fortune: -- if you feel awkward--

Sadiq Khan: Give me a chance to respond and I will.

Peter Fortune: -- well, that is fine.

Sadiq Khan: Give me chance to--

Peter Fortune: You are not responding to the question I am asking.

Sadiq Khan: Well--

Peter Fortune: You have said over and over again that the poorest in London do not have cars, the suggestion and the implication being that when the ULEZ expands out they will not be impacted by it. I am saying, OK, let me see where that data is because I would quite like to see where you are setting the mark of poorest as well. You have agreed to send me that data and I will look forward to receiving it. Thank you, Deputy Chairman.

Sadiq Khan: And I look forward to many conversations to explain to the Member about poverty and the difference between poor households and--

Peter Fortune: That is absurd, again, and frankly insulting and ignorant of my background actually, MrMayor.

Keith Prince: I am going to now call a halt to this and say, MrMayor, if you can be just a little bit more respectful of Members, it would be greatly appreciated. I can understand where you are coming from, but also you have to understand where other people are coming from as well. I am going to--

Sadiq Khan: Deputy Chairman, I am happy to take guidance from you as to how in a respectful way I can help the Member have more experience of poor Londoners’ experience.

Peter Fortune: Again, that is absolutely absurd and ignorant of my background, and you need to behave more in the standing with your office.

Sadiq Khan: Says a Boris Johnson-supporting Tory Member.

Keith Prince: OK, I am not--

Peter Fortune: It is like a playground and a senior school bully.

Keith Prince: Order. I am not going to allow this to decline into a playground. Frankly, both Members need to heighten the level of debate here.

Sadiq Khan: He is the Member. I am the Mayor.

Keith Prince: Yes, MrMayor, you just have to stop making those little digs. It does not become the office; it really does not.

Russian Invasion of Ukraine

Sem Moema: Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, what options are there to seize property in London owned by Russian Oligarchs and allies of Putin? What would be the impact on house prices, supply and London’s housing market as a whole?

Sadiq Khan: For far too long, Ministers have turned a blind eye to the use of our capital’s homes as a safe harbour for oligarchs to park their cash, which is having a negative impact on both our international reputation and our local housing market. As I said in answer to a question from AssemblyMemberDesai, Transparency International estimates that £1.1billion worth of London properties are owned by individuals accused of corruption in Russia or with links to the Kremlin. Seizing this property would hurt Putin’s allies and could provide a means of support for the victims of his war. However, as things stand, neither I nor London boroughs have the power to seize property linked to corruption or to sanction individuals and the powers currently available are very limited. For example, boroughs can apply for an Empty Dwelling Management Order to bring vacant property back to use but only under very limited conditions. Any new powers therefore rely upon action from the Government. I know that both the Justice Secretary and the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities have recently expressed support for using the properties of sanctioned individuals for humanitarian purposes. I welcome these comments and I would be happy to work with the Government to develop these proposals. In the meantime, I have called for other measures, including an expanded range of taxes on overseas purchases, a robust register of beneficial property ownership and more use of Unexplained Wealth Orders. Each of these measures would need to be carefully designed to limit loopholes and be backed up with sufficient resources for monitoring and enforcement.

Sem Moema: Thank you, Mayor. I really welcome your comments about the impact on the housing market here in London. It is not just those people that own their houses outright, but it has a knock-on impact on people in the social housing sector, people wanting to access shared ownership and, of course, you will be not surprised to hear me mention private renters as well.
You also talked about how Transparency International estimates around £1.1billion in 100 properties alone and I know that in Bishops Avenue in Barnet there are 120 bedrooms that could be put to better use, rather than just being rotting places to park dirty cash. What progress are conversations that you have had with the Government making to make sure that we can work with the Government to either seize properties from overseas or do that in a proper, measured way and to make sure that we can stop the flow of dirty cash from Russia really impacting our city’s economy and housing market?

Sadiq Khan: As I said in my answer, we have heard publicly members of the Cabinet expressing their concern, but they have to move quickly because what I worry about is fire sales, these oligarchs selling off the assets and the money leaving London. Think of the symbolic impact of Putin’s mates having their properties being used for housing Ukrainians and the pressure they would then bring upon Putin because they are worried about their assets being lost. That is why it is really important the Government moves quickly. Other countries in mainland Europe have moved quickly, seizing assets, seizing property and so forth. We have been a bit slow, but when I listened to what [The Rt Hon] MichaelGove [MP, Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities] said and others, I think they get it, but the issue is speed and that is why I am really keen for them to move quickly.

Sem Moema: I am really also interested in the point that you have made about the overseas assets register. Again, it would have impacts here in the Ukraine crisis and addressing which Russian oligarchs own what in London. However, more broadly, as we have seen through the cladding and fire safety scandal, there are just basic issues with ordinary tenant issues. Tracking down who actually is the beneficial owner of a property in London is virtually impossible unless you can afford private investigators as some boroughs have been forced to do. What better use could we put that to and how can we make sure that we really know who owns the homes in London?

Sadiq Khan: Thank you for your question. If you think about it logically, what could be the reason why you are trying to hide what you own? It begs the question, but secondly you are right. It has an inflationary ratchet effect on property, all these properties being bought and used as gold bricks and what compounds this and is offensive to Londoners is they are then left empty. I am not against foreigners coming to London. Some of my best friends and family are foreigners. What I object to is Russian oligarchs and others close to Putin and others buying property in London as gold bricks and leaving them empty. That is why it is really important we have at last, six years after David Cameron promised it, a list of all those properties owned by people from overseas. Beneficial ownership is really important so we can see who owns what. Also, at best all a council can do is double its council tax. If you are a billionaire, do you really object to paying £2,000 rather than £1,000 in council tax? We need to give councils more powers as well in relation to empty properties, not just charging more in council tax but seizing them if they are just sitting there empty and not being used.

London Power

Susan Hall: Is the Mayor concerned about London Power's lack of customer acquisition?

The Mayor: Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I set up London Power in January 2020 to offer fair, affordable and green energy, because London - with higher rates of pre-payment metres and lower levels of switching - is hit particularly hard by the dysfunctional energy market.
Energy prices rose to unprecedented levels over the last year and the resulting energy retail crisis has seen over 30 energy suppliers fail since London Power launched. In the face of high energy prices, London Power, like other responsible energy companies, is advising customers to stay with their current supplier through the winter. This approach has led to the lowest levels of energy switching across the market on record, 73% lower than last year. Despite this, London Power has over 6,400 satisfied customers with an excellent trust pilot rating.
Energy prices will increase by 54% this April and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine caused already record high wholesale gas prices to double. Customer acquisition remains on hold across the industry as best offers are substantially above the price cap. Londoners will already be paying over £6billion to heat and power their homes over the next year, double what they were paying in 2020. Prices were expected to increase even further this autumn.
Given all this, I am focused on doing all I can to help the most vulnerable. In December, I announced a £51million package to tackle fuel poverty to help Londoners stay warm and improve the energy efficiency of thousands of homes. My Warmer Homes Advice Service supports low income Londoners through advice and support with energy debt and access to bill discounts. I have allocated a further £3.7million to advise Londoners in financial hardship. I continue to urge the Government to help the most vulnerable with the unprecedented increase in energy costs. VAT on energy bills should be cut immediately. Households cannot be expected to repay the £200 energy bill rebate while energy bills are still rising. Taxing the windfall profits of energy companies would pay for all of this, and it is an obvious way to reintroduce some fairness into a market that has long been skewed against the consumer. Now, more than ever, it is of the utmost importance that the Government adopts an Energy Strategy that rapidly reduces our fossil fuel consumption and moves us more quickly to a net zero clean energy system.
Susan Hall AM: When can we expect London Power to break even if it is not acquiring new customers?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): As I have said, because we are not acquiring new customers, we will not be reducing the reliance upon City Hall. We have seen a reduction in relation to reliance up until the pandemic began. We paused marketing activities in March 2020. Those marketing activities are still paused because any offer that London Power or any supplier would make would be above what the cap is and that would be immoral to be asking people to join our power and pay more than the energy cap.
Keith Prince AM (Deputy Chairman in the Chair): Mayor, your time is up. Thank you very much.

Londonwide ULEZ Expansion

Leonie Cooper: In December 2016, I wrote suggesting the expanded ULEZ should cover the whole of London. Your gradual approach and gradual expansion from the central zone to inner orbitals has so far paid off in terms of improved early compliance. How will you ensure that the latest consultation and expansion to the outer orbital results in even better compliance?

Sadiq Khan: Can I thank the Member for her support on our policies to clean up air and her pushing of me to go even further. I know she takes a real interest in her constituents, particularly the poorer ones who live in [the London Boroughs of] Wandsworth and Merton, many of whom for obvious reasons do not own a car. They are really struggling to choose between putting food on the table and heat for their home. She will know that the poorest Londoners, least likely to own a car, suffer the worst consequences of air pollution in relation to premature deaths, in relation to asthma, in relation to heart disease, in relation to cancer, in relation to lung disease and other issues. The problems are not caused by them; they are owned by those who are much wealthier than them, often people who own cars.
We have done a number of things over the last few years, all of them in this area opposed by the Conservatives, to clean up the air in London. They opposed the ULEZ in central London, which you supported, they opposed the ULEZ in inner London and, unsurprisingly, they are now opposing the expansion of the ULEZ to cover all of London. The good news is because of our policies the number of non-compliant vehicles has gone down, the number of compliant vehicles has gone up from 39% when we first announced these policies - and they opposed them - to now approaching 93% in the expanded zone and 82.5% across London in its entirety. I am confident that our policies will make further progress, which is why we are going to consult on them from May[2022].

Léonie Cooper: Thank you very much, MrMayor, and the direction of travel has been clear. What do you see as being the key health benefits of the gradual expansion from central to North and South Circular and then out across the whole of London?

Sadiq Khan: What we have seen, first in central London and then inner London, is a huge improvement in air. In central London, the amount of toxic air reduced by almost a half, nitrogen dioxide by 44%, particulate matter by around 27% and carbon emissions by around 5%. Going to inner London leads to further improvements, but the improvements in outer London have been less good than central and inner London. Actually, those who are least likely to own a car in outer London - often the poorest - suffer the worst consequences. What we are trying to do is to ensure that clean air is a human right rather than a privilege. It is really important that we begin consultation in Mayso we can see all Londoners benefiting from clean air, rather than just those who are lucky enough to live in central or inner London.

Léonie Cooper: I have compared access to clean air as being something similar to access to clean water and it should be the right of all Londoners to have access to that.
We were just talking about the impact on trying to persuade people away from individual car ownership towards the Mayor’s Transport Strategy of 80% of journeys being done by active travel or on public transport. The scrappage scheme is obviously something that we have just touched on and that is really important, but also car clubs are another way of persuading people to move away from individual vehicle ownership. It may then be a stepping-stone into them getting rid of a vehicle altogether, but in outer London people do feel the need sometimes, because journeys can be longer, to still have access to a vehicle. Would you agree with me, car clubs as well as scrappage?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, car clubs are a real innovation over the last few years, and they have been around for some time, but their increase is really good because sometimes you will need a car.

Léonie Cooper: Sure.

Sadiq Khan: Having the ability to get a car from a car club means you can give up the car you own, save a lot of money in relation to the costs of running a car and still have access to a car. The scrappage scheme will help in getting the most polluting vehicles off the road to help make the transition, but the proximity and availability of a car club will make you less nervous about no longer owning a car. You are right; both go together, the scrappage schemes and the increasing availability of cars from a car club.

Léonie Cooper: Given the cost of living crisis that we are now experiencing and unfortunately the failure of the Chancellor [of the Exchequer] yesterday, as you said, to come forward with any concrete proposals to help those who are the least well off, how important is scrappage in that context?

Sadiq Khan: It is really important. I know from being a Londoner and spending time with people from all backgrounds that poorest Londoners, least likely to own a car, will not benefit from a five pence fuel duty cut.

Léonie Cooper: No.

Sadiq Khan: I am happy to send the evidence to Members, who do not realise that, if they need the evidence, but also, we know in the last couple of weeks the fuel duty has gone up by more than five pence anyway. It is really important to make sure there are policies to help the poorest Londoners and yesterday was a missed opportunity.

Léonie Cooper: Thank you very much, MrMayor.